What We've All Been Waiting For: Al Gore in 24-Hour Broadcast to Convert 'Climate Skeptics'

Is there a prize for anyone who stays awake for the entire screed? A lifetime supply of Sominex? This dude puts me to sleep in two minutes. How on earth in the balance can someone handle 24 hours of this colossal bore?

Former President Al Gore will renew his 30-year campaign to convince skeptics of the link between climate change and extreme weather events this week in a 24-hour global multi-media event.

"24 Hours of Reality" will broadcast a presentation by Al Gore every hour for 24 hours across 24 different time zones from Wednesday to Thursday, with the aim of convincing climate change deniers and driving action against global warming among households, schools and businesses.

The campaign also asks people to hand over control of their social networking accounts on Facebook and Twitter to it for 24 hours to deliver Gore's message.

Hand over control of Twitter and Facebook accounts? Gee, what could go wrong with that risky scheme?

"There will be 200 new slides arguing the connection between more extreme weather and climate change," Trewin Restorick, chief executive of the event's UK partner Global Action Plan, told Reuters on Monday.

"There will be a full-on assault on climate skeptics, exploring where they get their funding from."

Hmm, a full-on assault? Sounds pretty violent. Won't this scare the children or something?

The Goracle claims for 24 hours, we will all live in reality. Unlike the rest of the year when Gore lives in his massive oceanfront mansion laying down a carbon footprint that dwarfs mere mortals.

Here's an idiotic video clip through their link.



In Gore's typical cowardly fashion, you can't comment on it. That sure is a means of stifling those evil deniers! So much for an honest debate.

NSF 'Investigation' Allegedly Clears Climate Hoaxer

As if the National Science Foundation is going to actually find wrongdoing by a guy living off their payroll.

An investigation by the National Science Foundation has found no evidence of wrongdoing or misconduct by Penn State climate-change researcher Michael Mann.

Mann, Penn State professor of meteorology, was the target of accusations from climate-change skeptics after thousands of e-mails exchanged between climate-change researchers were hacked from the University of East Anglia and made public.

Critics pointed to the e-mails as evidence that Mann and other scientists had hidden and manipulated data to bolster the argument for global warming.

The university was swamped with e-mails and calls criticizing Mann. Altough no formal allegations were made, the university formed a panel of five faculty members to investigate the Mann’s conduct.

The panel found no evidence of research misconduct in three of the four areas it examined, including falsifying data and misusing confidential information. But it concluded that further investigation was needed into whether Mann did anything not in keeping with accepted practices for proposing, conducting or reporting research.

So he's not entirely in the clear as the headline implies.

Warmers rejoice!

The so-called 'closeout memo' is here.

Oh No! Arctic Scientist Under Investigation

Remember all that nonsense about polar bears disappearing, even though their numbers kept growing? Yeah, about that.

A federal wildlife biologist whose observation in 2004 of presumably drowned polar bears in the Arctic helped to galvanize the global warming movement has been placed on administrative leave and is being investigated for scientific misconduct, possibly over the veracity of that article.

Charles Monnett, an Anchorage-based scientist with the U.S. Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement, or BOEMRE, was told July 18 that he was being put on leave, pending results of an investigation into "integrity issues." But he has not yet been informed by the inspector general's office of specific charges or questions related to the scientific integrity of his work, said Jeff Ruch, executive director of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility.

H/T.

Another scam bites the dust.

In the peer-reviewed article, the researchers said they were reporting, to the best of their knowledge, the first observations of polar bears floating dead offshore and presumed drowned while apparently swimming long distances in open water. Polar bears are considered strong swimmers, they wrote, but long-distance swims may exact a greater metabolic toll than standing or walking on ice in better weather.

They said their observations suggested the bears drowned in rough seas and high winds and "suggest that drowning-related deaths of polar bears may increase in the future if the observed trend of regression of pack ice and/or longer open water periods continues."

The article and presentations drew national attention and helped make the polar bear something of a poster child for the global warming movement. Al Gore's mention of the polar bear in his documentary on climate change, "An Inconvenient Truth," came up during investigators' questioning of Gleason in January.

These people should be brought up on charges.

Sign of the Times: 'Stop Global Warming' Sign Buried in the Snow

This amusing photo goes hand in glove with this idiocy:

That snow outside is what global warming looks like

There is now strong evidence to suggest that the unusually cold winters of the last two years in the UK are the result of heating elsewhere.

Who says something so stupid? Why, a renowned "expert" who was exposed as a total fraud during ClimateGate, of course. But wait, ten years ago we were told snow was a thing of the past. Oops.

Daniel Hannan is amused.

For all I know, Monbiot may be right. It just seems remarkably convenient that any climatic trend is the fault of greenhouse gases . Getting hotter? Global warming! Getting cooler? Global warming! Average overcast October day? Gaea is on her last legs!

But ... but ... NASA is telling us the truth!

Ye-e-s. There’s just one problem with this. Can anyone spot what it is? That’s right: the clue is in that phrase “published by NASA”. See, going to NASA GISS for reliable, unbiased temperature data is a bit like asking Charles Manson for tips on how best to set up a commune where everyone’s happy and no one gets ritually murdered or anything. James Hansen, the guy in charge of NASA’s dataset, is so committed to the religion of AGW he makes Al Gore sound like Viscount Monckton.

Can't wait to see them explain Australia's white summer.

It just turned to winter today here in the United States. We in the northeast have been freezing since at least Thanksgiving. I can't wait for spring. Just hope it warms up a bit by then.

Update: Submitted for further amusement.

BBC 'Science' Reporter Insists Polar Bears In Trouble

I think it is time for the BBC to get a new science reporter. Today's breathless headline proclaims Polar bears can be saved by emissions cuts, study says.

Well that is all fine and dandy except for the fact that the polar bears don't need saving. Their population has been growing over the last decade.
From 2007:

In the Davis Strait area, a 140,000-square kilometre region, the polar bear population has grown from 850 in the mid-1980s to 2,100 today.

"There aren't just a few more bears. There are a hell of a lot more bears," said Mitch Taylor, a polar bear biologist who has spent 20 years studying the animals.

And then there is this story from Jan of this year with anecdotal evidence.

In the Western Hudson Bay area, where harvest quotas were reduced by 80 percent four years ago, communities are complaining about the number of polar bears. “Now people can look out the window and see as many as 20 polar bears at the ice-flow edge,” Flaherty says.

During a public hearing last September focusing on the polar bear population in the Baffin Bay region, hunters reported more sightings of females with three cubs. The normal litter is one or two. Flaherty, himself a serious hunter, says the abundant food supply – primarily baby ring seals – in the area is responsible for the bigger litters.

The on-the-ground reports, if accurate, seem to contradict the official story of the beleaguered polar bear. According to the standard theory, warmer temperatures (caused by human CO2 emissions) are shrinking the ice floe, the polar bear’s main hunting ground, forcing populations to compete for a diminishing food supply. Warmer temperatures also are to blame for the loss of thicker “multi-year ice.”

The BBC writer also seems to be worried about polar bears breeding with grizzlies, and while that might be of some concern if you were to stumble across one of these monsters I wonder if the author is harboring some sort of racist thinking. Can't have those white bears breeding with the brown ones after all, we all know what happens next.

Dr Brendan Kelly of the US National Marine Mammal Laboratory, and colleagues, write in a separate comment piece about the possibility of increased cross-breeding between the polar and grizzly bears.

A polar bear with patches of brown fur was shot by hunters in 2006 and this year, a hunter killed a polar bear thought to be the offspring of a polar-grizzly hybrid.

Dr Kelly suggests that as the ice cap melts and polar bears go ashore, the natural barrier between the bear populations will fall, and such hybrids, dubbed "pizzly bears" by some, might become more commonplace.

But hey, don't let real facts get in the way of your religion, er science.

Global Warmers Party in Cancun While Peasants Freeze to Death in Europe

So nice to see the global warming extremists party hard down in Cancun while Europeans are dying of cold in the streets. Surely they'll pay their respects to the dead once they shake off their hangovers and declare a fierce moral urgency to combat global cooling.

FREEZING weather has claimed 26 lives across Central Europe this week including 18 deaths in Poland where temperatures plunged to minus 33 degrees Celsius.

"Ten people died due to exposure over the last 24 hours across Poland after eight died on Tuesday," national police spokesman Mariusz Sokolowski said.

Alcohol and homelessness are common factors in the deaths and the victims are primarily men, aged 35 to 60, he added.

The two factors also played a role in the freezing deaths of four men aged 47 to 61 in the neighbouring Czech Republic over the last 48 hours, police confirmed.

In Lithuania, cold weather has also claimed four lives.

Heavy snow overnight on Wednesday to Thursday forced the closure of the international airport in the Czech capital Prague and wreaked havoc on road and railway networks, officials confirmed.

Heavy snowfall earlier this week grounded flights and caused transport chaos on Poland's road and rail networks.

Temperatures plunged on Tuesday night to minus 33 degrees Celsius in the eastern city of Bialystok near Poland's eastern border with Belarus.

They'll be in Cancun for a couple of weeks, so hopefully for them the deep freeze passes before they return.

In other deeply ironic news, Japan refuses to extend the meaningless Kyoto protocol.

The delicately balanced global climate talks in Cancún suffered a serious setback last night when Japan categorically stated its opposition to extending the Kyoto protocol – the binding international treaty that commits most of the world's richest countries to making emission cuts.

The Kyoto protocol was adopted in Japan in 1997 by major emitting countries, who committed themselves to cut emissions by an average 5% on 1990 figures by 2012.

However the US congress refused to ratify it and remains outside the protocol.

Not that the media will mention it, but that was a 97-0 vote in the U.S. Senate back in the 1990's. Of course that was Bush's fault or something.

Need Another Reason to Love Christie? Now He Questions Global Warming Scam

He pretty much takes the undecided position, meaning none of the wild claims by the global warming cultists have yet to be proven.

Gov. Chris Christie says he's skeptical that humans are responsible for global warming.

The governor, a new darling of the Republican Party, made the remark at a town hall meeting he hosted in Toms River Tuesday afternoon.

Asked by a man attending the event whether he thought mankind was responsible for global warming, Christie says he's seen evidence on both sides of the argument but thinks it hasn't been proven one way or another.

Unfortunately he didn't remove his jacket and proceed to bludgeon the questioner.

Meanwhile, the Baddest Governor on the Planet went off on the Parsippany schools superintendent. Enjoy.

Independent Investigation Slams IPCC Climate Scammers

The Great Global Warming Hoax took another one on the chin today. Not much left to this scam as their credibility has been close to zero since the ClimateGate emails first came to light late last year. Now that the clowns at the IPCC have een ordered to disclose their outside financial interest, expect a lot of sudden retirements.

An independent investigation into the UN’s climate change body has warned it to stop lobbying and to restrict its role to explaining the science behind any changes in global temperature.

Senior officials at the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have also been ordered to disclose their outside financial interests to avert any allegations that they may have profited from policies to tackle global warming.

New controls should also be introduced to ensure that the scientific claims made in influential international reports are robust in future.

The independent inquiry which delivered the rebuke was ordered after the IPCC admitted it had exaggerated the pace at which Himalayan glaciers were melting. Several other errors in its recent report were also uncovered.

The admission threatened to undermine the scientific basis used by Governments around the world to justify spending billions of pounds tackling climate change.

A more blunt assessment:

Independent climate scientist Peter Taylor said last night: “The IPCC’s credibility has been deeply dented and something has to be done. It can’t just be a matter of adjusting the practices. They have got to look at what are the consequences of having got it wrong in terms of what the public think is going on. Admitting that it needs to reform means something has gone wrong and they really do need to look at the science.”

Climate change sceptic David Holland, who challenged leading climate change scientists at the University of East Anglia to disclose their research, said: “The panel is definitely not fit for purpose. What the IAC has said is substantial changes need to be made.”

Dutch Agency: Our Climate Report is Riddled With Errors, But Global Warming Exists Anyway

If these clowns worked in the private sector they'd be laughed out of business. But since they're living off the government dime they still get to promote this hoax even though their work has been thoroughly discredited since they're aided and abetted by an uncritical media.

A leading Dutch environment agency reported Monday that the seminal 2007 U.N. scientific report on climate change is too generalized and has even more errors than discovered so far — including one contributed by the agency itself.

But the review by the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency claimed the errors had no effect on the fundamental conclusion by U.N. panel of scientists: that global warming caused by humans already is happening.

Glaring mistakes discovered in the 3,000-page report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change last year fed into an atmosphere of skepticism over the reliability of climate scientists who have been warning for many years that human-induced emissions of greenhouse gases could have catastrophic consequences, including rising sea levels, drought and the extinction of nearly one-third of the Earth's species.

The errors put scientists on the defensive just as a major conference on climate change in Copenhagen, attended by some 120 world leaders, met with limited success to agree on how to limit carbon emissions and contain the worst effects of global warming.

The Dutch agency acknowledged responsibility for one mistake by the IPCC when it reported in 2005 that 55 percent of the Netherlands is below sea level, when only 26 percent is. The report should have said 55 percent is prone to flooding, including river flooding.

"The incorrect wording in the IPCC report does not affect the message of the conclusion," that the Netherlands is highly susceptible to sea level rise, it said. "The lesson to be learned for an assessment agency such as ours is that quality control is needed at the primary level."

The second previously reported error claimed the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035, which the Dutch agency partly traced to a report on the likely shrinking of glaciers by the year 2350.

The review, which lasted six months, also found several other errors in the IPCC report on regional impacts of climate change — one of four separate IPCC reports in 2007 — although it said they were inconsequential.

The original report said global warming will put 75 million to 250 million Africans at risk of severe water shortages in the next 10 years, but a recalculation showed that range should be 90 million to 220 million, the agency said.

Another error it found involved the effect of wind turbulence on anchovy fisheries on Africa's west coast.

The Dutch agency said it examined 32 conclusions in the summary that the IPCC produced as a guideline for policy makers on the impact of climate change in eight regions.

Some conclusions were based on "insufficiently founded generalizations," and it found instances where the scientific references were unclear.

You Can Relax Now: Global Warming 'Tipping Point' Postponed Until 2200

So many tipping points, so little time. Well, actually, we've all got plenty of time and I now plan on increasing my carbon footprint to absurd levels.

Well, at least these self-proclaimed experts can now rest in eternal peace knowing none of them will still be around when they're all proven wrong.

The 14 scientists, all experts in their fields of climate research, were asked about the probability of a tipping point being reached some time before 2200 if global warming continued on the course of the worst-case scenarios predicted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Nine of the fourteen scientists said that the chances of a tipping point for the high scenario were greater than 90 per cent, with only one saying that the chances were less than 50:50. At current rates of CO2 emissions, the world is on course for following the higher trajectory on global warming suggested by the IPCC.

Via this hot tip.

'Global Warming is Over -- at Least for a Few Decades'

The science is settled.

The hottest new trend in climate change may be global cooling, some researchers say.

Contrary to the commonly held scientific conclusion that the Earth is getting warmer, Dr. Don Easterbrook, emeritus professor of geology at Western Washington University and author of more than 150 peer-reviewed papers, has unveiled evidence for his prediction that global cooling is coming soon.

“Rather than global warming at a rate of 1 F per decade, records of past natural cycles indicate there may be global cooling for the first few decades of the 21st century to about 2030,” said Easterbrook, speaking on a scientific panel discussion with other climatologists. This, he says, will likely be followed by “global warming from about 2030 to 2060,” which will then be followed by another cooling spell from 2060 to 2090.

Easterbrook spoke before a group of about 700 scientists and government officials at the fourth International Conference on Climate Change. The conference is presented annually in Chicago by the Heartland Institute, a conservative nonprofit think tank that actively questions the theory of man's role in global warming. Last year the Institute published Climate Change Reconsidered, a comprehensive reply to the United Nations' latest report on climate change.

"Global warming is over -- at least for a few decades," Easterbrook told conference attendees. "However, the bad news is that global cooling is even more harmful to humans than global warming, and a cause for even greater concern."

His 50 peer-reviewed papers are exactly 150 more than famed climatoligst Al Gore has authored, so I tend to side with Easterbrook. Speaking of Gore, check out this depressing montage from the porcine propagandist.



Nothing like cheering up the graduates, fatboy.

It's Come to This: Report Says Global Warming May Cause Cancer and Mental Illness

Actually, I think it's a mental illness if you believe in the global warming scam.

A new government report says global warming could lead to an increase in both cancer and mental illness worldwide, and it calls for more federally funded research to determine how that might happen.

The report, A Human Health Perspective on Climate Change, was published by the Interagency Working Group on Climate Change and Health – a combination of scientists from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, NIH, State Department, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Department of Agriculture, the EPA, and the Department of Health and Human Services.

Oh yeah, let's dump more money down the government research rathole trying to justify this massive hoax.

So how can this cause mental illness? By driving people nuts with endless stories about this hoax? Driving them insane when they realize they've been had by the warmers?

The possible mental health conditions that could be caused by global warming range from irritability to Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, sexual dysfunction, and drug abuse.

“The most common mental health conditions associated with extreme events range from acute traumatic stress to more chronic stress-related conditions such as post-traumatic stress disorder, complicated grief, depression, anxiety disorders, somatic complaints, poor concentration, sleep difficulties, sexual dysfunction, social avoidance, irritability, and drug or alcohol abuse,” reads the report.

It's official. Global warming is responsible for everything.

H/T FFF.

'They Were Experiencing Temperatures That Weren't Expected With Global Warming'

Good grief, are these people stupid. They so desperately want to prove non-existent global warming is happening they go down to Antarctica and are baffled when they experience freezing weather. And in the case of this moron, nearly die of frostbite.

Laughing my ass off.

TOM Smitheringale wanted to prove the world was warming. Now he's another alarmist with frostbite.

The 40-year-old from Perth planned to be the first Australian to trek unassisted to the North Pole, but announced he'd raise some consciousness along the way.

As he wrote on his website: "Part of the reason Tom's One Man Epic is taking place now is because of the effect that global warming is having on the polar ice caps."

Indeed, he wanted to see the North Pole while it was still there: "Some scientists have even estimated that the polar ice cap will have entirely melted away by 2014!"

But Antarctica isn't melting away, and Arctic ice has slowly increased since its big low in 1997.

But no one seems to have told Tom, who soon found his extremities freezing.

Two weeks ago he nearly called off his trek after suffering excruciating pain in his fingers and thumbs, forcing him to call in emergency help.

And last week he had to be rescued by Canadian soldiers after falling through the ice sheet.

"(I) came very close to the grave," he said, on being flown out.

This is actually now the fourth year running that warming alarmists have had to be rescued from expeditions to prove the Arctic is warmer than it actually is. It's a metaphor.

Last year it was British eco-explorer Pen Hadow and his two-person team who had to be flown out mid-stunt, after battling brutal sub-zero weather conditions that gave the team's photographer frostbite.

The year before, eco-adventurer Lewis Gordon Pugh was similarly thwarted.

He'd planned to kayak 1200km to the North Pole to raise awareness of how global warming had allegedly melted the ice sheet so badly that scientists warned the North Pole that summer could be ice-free.

No such luck. Pugh had to pull out, still 1000km from the finish, when a great barrier of sea ice blocked his route.

The year before gave even more farcical entertainment.

"Explorers and educators" Ann Bancroft and Liv Arnesen said they were off on what reporters described as "a historic 75-day expedition to the North Pole and beyond to raise awareness of global warming's impact on the fragile Arctic".

It turned out that what was fragile was not the Arctic but the alarmists, who had to call off their big trip not long after it started, when Arnesen suffered frostbite in three of her toes, and extreme cold drained their batteries.

Explained a spokesman: "They were experiencing temperatures that weren't expected with global warming."

Like the globe, really.

Can I be the only one who'd like to ship Al Gore's fat ass down there for a similar expedition?

H/T Gateway Pundit.

ClimateGate Scientists Cleared Of Wrongdoing

Sort of.

An external investigation was conducted into the East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit over the data they produced related to global temperatures and the whole global warming, Al Gore scam. While the report findings said they found only minor things wrong with what East Anglia did, they did kick the blame to the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Their research was, however, misrepresented by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which failed to reflect uncertainties the scientists had reported concerning the raw temperature data.

The investigators findings, however, seem to be dubious at best. They claim the scientists at East Anglia acted professionally while qualifying their report with these nuggets.

An inquiry panel of leading scientists, nominated by the Royal Society, said that the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit may not have used the best methods for analysing temperature records.

The unit had also failed to store all its data and keep full records of exactly what it had done, preventing other scientists from checking all its findings.

In what has become so symptomatic in today's culture, the results were not what mattered but rather the earnestness with which the work was done.

“We found them to be objective and dispassionate in their view of the data and their results, and there was no hint of tailoring results to a particular agenda.

“Their sole aim was to establish as robust a record of temperatures in recent centuries as possible.”

The report goes on to blame the East Anglia's personnel of not using good sound statistical analysis, but continues to blame the IPCC for misreading the information.

So let me get this straight. The scientists used faulty calculation practices, failed to maintain adequate records of their data, and did not go on record to dispute any of the wrong uses of the data they provided but because they worked really, really, hard everything is good.

If the scientists at East Anglia were upset about the misrepresentation of their reports they sure didn't raise too much a fuss about it. While Al Gore and his Global Warming alarmists were making films, selling books and charging enormous speaking fees to tell the rest of the world that we were doomed, they raised not a single objection.

The investigating team has done their job. They passed the buck on to the IPCC while exonerating their own while confirming everything that had caused the findings of this group to come into question.

Great News: Cow Farts Don't Cause Global Warming

Another silly myth now bites the dust.

In the past environmentalists, from Lord Stern to Sir Paul McCartney, have urged people to stop eating meat because the methane produced by cattle causes global warming.

However a new study found that cattle grazed on the grasslands of China actually reduce another greenhouse gas, nitrous oxide.

Authors of the paper, published in Nature, say the research does not mean that producing livestock to eat is good for the environment in all countries. However in certain circumstances, it can be better for global warming to let animals graze on grassland.

The research will reignite the argument over whether to eat red meat after other studies suggested that grass fed cattle in the UK and US can also be good for the environment as long as the animals are free range.

Klaus Butterbach-Bahl, of the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology in Germany, carried out the study in Inner Mongolia in China. He found that grassland produced more nitrous oxide during the spring thaw when sheep or cattle have not been grazing. This is because the greenhouse gas, also known as laughing gas, is released by microbes in the soil. When the grass is long snow settles keeping the microbes warm and providing water, however when the grass is cut short by animals the ground freezes and the microbes die.

Dr Butterbach-Bahl said the study overturned assumptions about grazing goats and cattle.

"It's been generally assumed that if you increase livestock numbers you get a rise in emissions of nitrous oxide. This is not the case," he said.

The science is settle, I guess.

I'm going to fire up some steaks tonight in celebration.

More Than Ever Believe Global Warming is Nonsense

ManBearPig hardest hit.

Gallup's annual update on Americans' attitudes toward the environment shows a public that over the last two years has become less worried about the threat of global warming, less convinced that its effects are already happening, and more likely to believe that scientists themselves are uncertain about its occurrence. In response to one key question, 48% of Americans now believe that the seriousness of global warming is generally exaggerated, up from 41% in 2009 and 31% in 1997, when Gallup first asked the question.

This tends to happen when the constant gloom and doom scenarios never come to fruition. I guess the Warmers will just have to become more hysterical now.

UK Independence Party Seeks to Ban Al Gore Junk Science Schlockumentary

Let's hope they start doing it in schools here as well. It's a start. Click the image for a review of all his lies.

Pending the results of the commission, the party, that has no MPs at the moment, have promised to build new fossil-fuelled power stations to meet energy demands and scrap subsidies for wind farms. Global warming 'propaganda' like the Al Gore film Inconvenient Truth will be banned in schools and public authorities will not be allowed to spend money on climate change initiatives.

A recent poll found the just one in five people believe climate change is man-made, compared to one in three a year ago.

The survey of 1,000 people found people over 65 were more likely to be sceptical.

Viscount Monckton of Brenchley, the UKIP climate change spokesman, said his party was the only opportunity to vote against the climate change consensus.

"At the moment all the major parties have decided to sign up to the eco-fascist agenda and therefore anyone who does not believe in eco-fascist agenda has no where else to go," he said.

Climate change sceptics claim that emails stolen from the University of East Anglia show scientists were willing to manipulate the data around global warming in a scandal known as 'climategate'.

In another scandal known as 'glaciergate' the UN body in charge of climate change science, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), was forced to retract a claim that the Himalayan glaciers could melt by 2035.

However leading scientists, including the Royal Society, insist the case for man-made global warming remains convincing and it is a grave threat to human civilisation.

Well, you can't ever expect the true believers to admit they're in on the hoax.

Climate Hoaxer to Face 'Independent' Inquiry

Somehow I doubt anything will come of this, but it appears the unusually hairy climate hoaxer and Al Gore pal Rajendra Pachauri will be facing an inquiry into his junk science.

Environment and Climate ministers meeting in closed session in Bali last night insisted that an independent review should be carried out following the publicising of mistakes in its last report, and a row surrounding Dr Pachauri's robust response to his critics. If his management is found to be at fault his position could become untenable.

Participants in the unprecedented meeting – held at the annual assembly of the Governing Council of the United Nations Environment Programme's (UNEP) Governing Council in Bali – were sworn to secrecy over the decision and it is only expected to be announced after its detaled scope and composition have been worked out by UNEP and the World Meteorological Organisation, the two UN agencies that oversee the IPCC's work.

How nice of these climate hoaxers to fly to Bali while the rest of the planet is freezing their asses off.

Amazingly, this scammer thought he could get to decide who performed the inquiry. Man, he's got bigger stones than Algore.

The ministers – led by Hillary Benn, the Environment Secretary,and his counterparts from Germany,. Norway, Algeria and Antigua and Barbuda – refused to allow Dr Pachauri to decide who would carry out the review, insisting it must be completely and demonstrably independent of the IPCC.

The two agencies are expected first to approach national academies of sciences and to ensure that it examines the management of the organisation as well as its scientific procedures.

The review is to report by August to allow time for its conclusions - and Dr Pachauri's position – to be assessed before the IPCC meets for its own annual assembly in Korea in October.

Any objective inquiry can result in only one thing: Pachauri's dismissal. A criminal prosecution and being stripped of the Nobel Prize would also be nice.

Now You Can Forget About Those Rising Seas

Another global warming myth comes crashing down. No warming since at least 1995, no melting glaciers and now no rising sea levels. Basically this leaves the warmers with no credibility, along with the U.S. media, which is largely ignoring this massive scandal.

Scientists have been forced to withdraw a study on projected sea level rise due to global warming after finding mistakes that undermined the findings.

The study, published in 2009 in Nature Geoscience, one of the top journals in its field, confirmed the conclusions of the 2007 report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). It used data over the last 22,000 years to predict that sea level would rise by between 7cm and 82cm by the end of the century.

At the time, Mark Siddall, from the Earth Sciences Department at the University of Bristol, said the study "strengthens the confidence with which one may interpret the IPCC results". The IPCC said that sea level would probably rise by 18cm-59cm by 2100, though stressed this was based on incomplete information about ice sheet melting and that the true rise could be higher.

Many scientists criticised the IPCC approach as too conservative, and several papers since have suggested that sea level could rise more. Martin Vermeer of the Helsinki University of Technology, Finland and Stefan Rahmstorf of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany published a study in December that projected a rise of 0.75m to 1.9m by 2100.

Siddall said that he did not know whether the retracted paper's estimate of sea level rise was an overestimate or an underestimate.

Announcing the formal retraction of the paper from the journal, Siddall said: "It's one of those things that happens. People make mistakes and mistakes happen in science." He said there were two separate technical mistakes in the paper, which were pointed out by other scientists after it was published. A formal retraction was required, rather than a correction, because the errors undermined the study's conclusion.

Seems an awful lot of "mistakes" have been happening with this crew from the IPCC, among others.

So why should we ever believe a thing these people say?

Al Gore Remains Unavailable for Comment

You've got to hand it to our friends down in Australia who are helping expose the global warming climate change hoax and who are having many a belly laugh at the expense of the warmers. Here we have a horse named Globalwarmingsceptic romping to victory in a race this weekend. Much hilarity follows.

Reports Jack Lacton, this site’s senior turf analyst: “Your humble correspondent had a lazy $50 on, picking up $415 and, in the process, making more money by investing in global warming scepticism than has been made from the tens of billions invested so far in so-called clean technologies.”

Well done, Jack. We will monitor the progress of this science-crushing superhorse as scepticism elsewhere continues to triumph.

Tim Blair, among others, are heroes in exposing this massive fraud.

What we are witnessing, in defiance of officialdom, government propaganda and the bulk of funded researchers in the field, is the collapse of a scientific paradigm. This is something that has never happened before. Politically speaking, it's a game-changer with the potential to overturn the normative assumptions commentators rely on. Not least of these is the idea that Australian voters will always give newly elected federal governments a second term.

In the latest edition of The Spectator, Matt Ridley, a veteran science journalist, offers an explanation for how the consensus came unstuck. "Despite 20 years of being told they were not just factually but morally wrong, of being compared to Holocaust deniers, of being told they deserved to be tried for crimes against humanity, of being avoided at parties, climate sceptics seem to be growing in number and confidence by the day. What is the difference?

"In a word, the internet. The `climate consensus' may hold the establishment -- the universities, the media, big business, government -- but it is losing the jungles of the web. After all, getting research grants, doing pieces to camera and advising boards takes time. The very ostracism the sceptics suffered has left them free to do their digging untroubled by grant applications and invitations to Stockholm."

And it is those who've braved the withering assaults who should be recognized and stand with their heads held high.

Part of Ridley's argument is that it's distinguished scientists in retirement, who have no fear of faculty censure or funding bodies and have nothing to lose, who have led the internet revolt. In Australia, that body includes Garth Paltridge, the author of The Climate Caper, and William Kininmonth, author of Climate Change: A Natural Hazard. As well as publishing books and journal articles, both have an internet presence.

Other local participants in the internet debate include Jennifer Marohasy, a doctoral fellow of the Institute of Public Affairs, and Joanne Nova at her blog JoNova. She is a freelance science presenter and author of a bestseller, The Sceptic's Handbook. Two News Limited journalists, Andrew Bolt and Tim Blair, have been especially diligent in keeping their mass audiences informed of fresh evidence as it has emerged, via their newspaper columns and, more important, their blogs.

The warmies, as Blair derisively, and appropriately, refers to them, are on the run.

At the risk of being called a denier, at what point can we discuss the revocation of the IPCC and Algore's Nobel Peace Prize, which was awarded as a result of such fraudulence?